28
Things don't need to have hands-on, human intent to be good or enjoyable. (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world
51 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I am all for supporting local artists and I feel that "handcrafted in XXX" products make great souvenirs when you're connected to those places. Still, if some AI hallucinated me a perfect novel for my interests, or generated something I couldnt tell was manufactured or created by a master, I would happily enjoy it.

"How can I tell if this is slop so I can know to hate it" sounds stupid to me: good is good. When it comes to art / food / products, I want the best experience for ME. If I want human connectedness, then I'll go interact with a human directly.

I can do without wasted water, power, and money, but in the abstract it seems to bother everyone on Lemmy to enjoy something a person didn't make. I don't have that hang-up.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

weirdYeah, I'm well aware I'm weird, for the recognition and compliments.sesquipedalian loquaciousnessI loved the composite word, better than "verbose", "lengthy", "prolific" or "hypergraphia". From now on, I'll gonna use it to describe my neurodivergent way of expressing when needed, thanks!...but... this labeling you made when faced by my lengthy replies made me wonder...In your original post, you alleged enjoying AI-hallucinated novels, I suppose "novels" as in the definition "A work of prose fiction, longer than a novella". So, if a lengthy text from a human is "sesquipedalian loquaciousness" (a pair of words of which are defining a text for its lengthiness, not just by its contents or contexts (to which you used the adjective "weird"), therefore you're expressing a discomfort, even if subconsciously, with lengthy texts), what kind of "novel" are you generating, when "novels" are usually as lengthy as my replies, if not lengthier?!unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    No I don't think you're weird, though you might be. I was referring to "the weird" like Lovecraftian weird tales.

    I think the posts you've given me to work with are full of pseudo religious, "alternative" bunk dressed up in long-winded prose and and upsold vocabulary. It may seem inciteful and profound to people that need a dictionary to read it, but to me it looks, well, c/ iamverysmart or c/im14andthisisdeep.

    To wit: "The use of complicated vocabulary and style as a mask for ignorance or to appear smarter is most commonly referred to as Sesquipedalian Loquaciousness.  This term describes the habit of using long, complex, or obscure words when simpler alternatives would suffice, often perceived as pretentious or an attempt to obscure a lack of substance."

    I don't even want to engage you because you've added so much word salad dressing here it's cringey to read your replies. If you want to leave lilith behind, distill down, and get to the point we can maybe reengage, but this isn't worth it to me.

    We can compare PhDs later, but right now this smarmy, oversold, middle school darks arts paper routine just makes me feel bad for you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    With your bigoted "if you leave Lilith behind", I also ending this exchange here, as not even christians who were intolerant with my beliefs had ever said this kind of religion-intolerant phrase to me. Oh, and just so you know, no, I'm not trying to pretend anything, I got no "PhD", differently from clankers which are programmed to pretend they're specialists on all things (it's literally in the name for the common kind of LLM training, "Mixture of Experts" MoE). Wish you a happy chatting with the clankers!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent